Federal judge temporarily blocks Tennessee's anti-drag law

Soo if I get this straight, we need to let men in drag queen clothes with hanging penises teach our children about gender, sex and how to be a queer, because more children die from guns.

Got it, still finding the logic here

a reply to: marg6043

Don't be silly. Drag Queens tuck their junk. www.robynwithawhy.com...

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes I know, got to make sure the bulk does not shows on the skin tight vinyl bodycon, darn looks painful.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

What's the point?

Why drag queens? It's not like they brought in blind people with service dogs to teach us about being blind. No one ever brought in people in wheelchairs to teach us about being quadra or paraplegic. They didn't even bring in drug addicts to teach us about addiction. We had 1 ... 1 ... motivational speaker in all my years of drug teaching who spoke on the topic who was a former addict.

We did not have drug addicts coming in ever year to teach it.

So why are drag queens the special unicorns who suddenly are absolutely necessarily to teach this?

a reply to: ketsuko

Because the money behind the push for drag queens in schools is big, big donors and they are mostly pedophiles with big money.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: vNex92
You mean he was another fake Trump appointee who is a leftist?

Are you saying Trump was duped by this guy? You are aware that Donald Trump has a very great brain, so it is not possible to get a fake past him.

how do you know
it's really a guy under those black robes?

could be a pretend guy like the mass murderer in nashville.

a reply to: ketsuko

So why are drag queens the special unicorns who suddenly are absolutely necessarily to teach this?

This isn't about drag queens teaching children anything. It's about their ability to freely express themselves in public.

The thing is about our constitutional republic is, even drag queen have constitutional rights.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Why in schools? They can freely express themselves anywhere and everywhere else. Why in schools? Do we now need pole dancers there? Should Stormy Daniels teach kids how to masturbate and have safe sex, you know ... the practicum (pun intended)? I mean, we all know that porn is part of free speech, so it would seem to me that if that's the route you're taking no one needs to wear clothing. Anyone should be able to just do it anywhere they want inside the school and with anyone, including the students. It's free expression after all.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Why in schools? They can freely express themselves anywhere and everywhere else. Why in schools? Do we now need pole dancers there? Should Stormy Daniels teach kids how to masturbate and have safe sex, you know ... the practicum (pun intended)? I mean, we all know that porn is part of free speech, so it would seem to me that if that's the route you're taking no one needs to wear clothing. Anyone should be able to just do it anywhere they want inside the school and with anyone, including the students. It's free expression after all.

well we all know why
they want a commiecon from hell teaching kids.

yes sookie, even ripley believe it or not rejects have rights, but the end where mine begins.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I wasn't "lamenting". I was stating what I know of gender affirmation and grooming in public schools from experience. I'm glad we're pulling away from girls wear pink play with Barbies, and boys wear blue and play with Tonka Trucks.

To start, that's a diversionary tactic. We're talking about cross-dressing groomers who openly talk about how wonderful cross-dressing, homosexuality, and even a sex change is, to impressionable young children in a captive environment who are too young to understand what is being peddled to them. That is a different issue from social norms between males and females.

But, that said, I don't see any problem with girls dressing in pink and playing with Barbie or boys dressing in blue and playing with Tonka trucks. Most will want to. I do have as much problem with you trying to convince kids to play with toys and dress in ways they don't want to as I do with the "system." Leave the kids alone; they can figure it out without you.

Gay and trans isn't contagious.

One couldn't tell it based on the way people are continually trying to get kids to "catch" it.

It amazes me: most people today recognize that the attempts to turn gay kids straight was wrong. But here you are wanting to do the exact same thing, just in the opposite direction.

What does that mean, "sexualize children"? Performing a sexy routine in front of them, like that America's Got Talent bit that I posted? Actually, molesting them? Does teaching a kid to shake their booty and do duck-lips count?

Possibly, yes, and yes.

If something is wrong, it is wrong even if you want to take it to a new extreme.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ketsuko

Who said anything about schools? Drag Queen story hours are at public libraries, not school libraries.

The only drag in school I know about are the high school rituals of football players, basket balls players, and wrestlers dressing in drag for fun and spectacle. You think that should be banned too?

Do you think a transgender person should be barred from teaching, working in the lunchroom, office or library of a public school? How about Drill Team? Can a trans person be on the Drill Team?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

The answer is no. That's why strip clubs are 18+.

Thank you for answering.

My next question is, why? Isn't dance an art form? Is it not covered under the First Amendment?

Do you support allowing children to have access to the weapon that has taken more lives than any other in history?

Dude, start a thread. You're trying to compare apples with Chevy trucks. I made my statement on that point; any more is off topic.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: ketsuko

If you don't want your kid to see a drag show, why are you bringing them to a drag show?

ummmm... How many articles would you like me to link with Schools bringing them in?

It is not a matter of taking them any longer. The sicko's are bringing them into schools.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

This isn't about drag queens teaching children anything.

Yes, it is. Read the title of the thread:

"Federal judge temporarily blocks Tennessee's anti-drag law"

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: TheRedneck

The leading cause for child death is gun violence. I don't see you advocating for any laws that could possibly reduce that.

Actually we do but the Democrats refuse to pass them since they want to take "OUR GUNS" not the criminals.

They have no wanting to address the root cause of the issue.... REPEAT OFFENDERS

Democrats - If We Lower Gun Crime, We Can't Push Gun Control & Bans

The Republicans support the Democrats who want this but the Democrat majority doesn't want to fix it because they want to "focus" on access to firearms (gun control).

www.abovetopsecret.com...

85% of the suspects arrested for gun crimes had been convicted of gun crimes previously.

someone with a prior gun conviction is 8,000 times more likely than someone without a criminal record to be arrested for a shooting

74% of both shooting victims and suspects had prior involvement with the criminal justice system and most had extensive criminal histories: 65% had been in prison, 73% had prior felony convictions and served periods of probation, the data shows.

On average, they had 10 prior arrests, three for felonies. Most are men (95%), 18- to 34-years-old (70%).

39% had charges pending from other crimes, but had been released from custody after posting bond.

The solution is easy... jail the offenders and leave them there. By the way, most of this so called "gun violence" is in select counties where the Democrat politicians are intentionally letting them out and off. It is a MANUFACTURED problem limited to small geographic areas in the nation by design.


giffords.org...

The vast majority of gun deaths among Black Americans are gun homicides, and Black Americans make up the majority of gun homicide victims in the US. In fact, 83% of all gun deaths among Black Americans are gun homicides.11 Despite the fact that Black boys and men account for just six percent of the total population, they comprise more than half of all gun homicide victims.12

The disparities in Black and white homicide rates are particularly stark in large cities and counties. Research suggests that roughly half of all gun homicides take place in just 127 cities

Gun violence is also the leading cause of death for Black children, in large part because of the severe burden of gun homicides on this population. In fact, while gun violence only recently became the leading cause of death for all children in 2020, gun violence has been the leading cause of death for Black children since 2006.20 Seventy-three percent of gun deaths among Black children are gun homicides, and, in 2021, Black children were nearly 13 times more likely to be killed in a gun homicide than white children.21

a reply to: TheRedneck

We're talking about cross-dressing groomers who openly talk about how wonderful cross-dressing, homosexuality, and even a sex change is, to impressionable young children in a captive environment who are too young to understand what is being peddled to them. That is a different issue from social norms between males and females.

No. You are. I'm talking about the law that the judge put a TRO on and why. It has nothing to do with groomers influencing children in a captive environment. It has to do with unconstitutionally defining all cross-dressing performances as obscene, like strippers, pole dancers, etc.,

What one is wearing doesn't define obscene. What one isn't wearing does, among other things. like language.

If something is wrong, it is wrong even if you want to take it to a new extreme.

Like I said, Tennessee law clearly defines "Obscenity". Otherwise, live and let live and get over the fact that drag queens have constitutional rights too.

a reply to: TheRedneck

ME:This isn't about drag queens teaching children anything.

YOU: Yes, it is. Read the title of the thread:
"Federal judge temporarily blocks Tennessee's anti-drag law"

The law is all about redefining drag as always obscene. It's about how the judge said the law was too broad and violates the US Constitution.

The Federal Judge was not operating on sentiment when he blocked the bill.

The bill is worded improperly and relies on language that does not serve its purpose.

Rhetoric is important people... definitions matter... and verbal gamesmanship has no place in legislation.

The way the bill lays out the 'newly designated' offense relies on broad wording with too broad a scope. I'm not saying it abrogates free speech... but the manner in which it is outlined it "could" do so... and the Judge has to uphold the idea of protecting free speech first...

The legislation can be 'skewed' to extend beyond the actual offense it purports to cover.

Don't worry, this stuff happens every time a certain kind of 'committee' produces legislation. They'll just have to do better... and we'll just have to endure the noise of the media show... and the memes... and the snarky mischaracterizations of any criticism of their behavior as as homophobia, or transphobia, or whatever new fear they can invent and toss around like a scarlet letter.

I just don't understand why this isn't more of a women's issue since it is they who are being 'used' the same way a dark skinned folks were with 'black face' performances with white performers (back in old cabaret days.)

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Wait, not all drag queens are trans? When did that happen? I thought leftists were very, very busy telling us that wasn't so.

And why are my tax dollars paying for drag shows at the local library? What, precisely, is the value of that?

If Ru Paul wants to read a story, then he can show up in his suit like he goes to a lot of others places. He doesn't need to dress in drag for it. Since drag isn't a lifestyle, it can be assumed that drag queens can be like that. Drag is performance art, after all, *not* a lifestyle.

a reply to: ketsuko

Back in the 80’s when I was in school, I went to many schools as part of drug education and prevention. We did a small acting troop called the Medicine Show (as a derivative of The Great American Medicine Show because we rewrote many of the skits).

Schools, youth groups, Government Chemical Weapons Manufacturing Facility, Ohio High School Guidance Counselors Conference (nothing a teenager does is funny to a guidance counselor until I did a *yes* slapstick skit and broke character to do a five minute ad-lib rant about finding a curtain pin on stage and how I “could have got hurt” by it left laying around. The surreal experience of breaking the fourth wall to share a joke with the audience because of the slapstick skit was too much. One woman, that I directed the monologue to when I saw her crack, slid down her chair and out of her dress laughing so hard. The guy beside her tried to help and almost helped her out of her slip as well.

They laughed after that, which was important. The governor’s wife was there in his place to see if he was going to sign funding for us to teach other groups in other schools as we could have traveled every day if it was legal as requests were that high. As it was there was a three year waiting list to schedule us.

But at the end of the show, one counselor wasn’t laughing. She was fuming. Mine. She directed the Spring Musicals and wanted assurances that I was auditioning because I didn’t do the one before. Because I am not a singer. She said let her worry about that…Three musicals and only had to do two group songs, one of which was spoken word as a song. All three had large non singing roles.